ccnsu/tthg - epa.wa.gov.au · Omex site located on Clayton Road in Bellevue. The investigation was...

ccnsu/tthg Ausfra!!a

DOCUMENT NO: VW1 100/31 5IRP-00-004-0

DIOXIN TESTING

AT THE OMEX SITE

Client: DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

Report: RP-00-004-0

Dated: NOVEMBER1999

Copyngbt Notice: Egis Consulting Australia Ply Limited 1999 The copyright in this work is vested in Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited and the document is issued in confidence for the purpose only for which it is supplied. It must not be reproduced in whole or in part except under an agreement with, or with the consent in writing of, Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited and then only on the condition that this notice appears in any such reproduction. No information as to the contents or subject matter of this document or any part thereof may be given orally or in writing or communicated in any manner whatsoever to any third party without prior consent in writing of Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited

26.11.99 1 Final Report Issued to Client I DER I SAB

Deparimentol 628.54(941.1) EG1 Environmental Protection Copy A Library

111111 llII 11111 IllI illil IIIi 11111 lIlI IN 1111111111 IN

0 19990097/1

Environmental Protecuthority

EG- IS I. Qol9 7

G1S CO1SULT!NG AUSTRALIA

DATE

L

EDOC.

____ I IvJ5+ 01ST CT1GtThNAT1AL. DATE I - L/J7 H7h2J

Mr Bryan Jenkins Chief Executive Officer Deparnent of Environmental Protection

Na. FiLE

Dear Bryan V I It 7c1

OMEX REHABILITATION SITE - DIOXIiN INVESTIGATION REPORT

Thankyou for referrihg the Dioxin Investigation Report relating to the Omex Site Remediation.

The Dioxin sampling program was undertaken by the Waste Management division of the Department of Environmental Protection in accordance with the requirements of the Environment Protection Authority. The sampling program was aimed to undertake Polychlorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDD) and Polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDF) analyses on materials assessed as having the greatest potential of containing elevated concentrations of PCDD and PCDF. The objective of the program was to collect sufficient information to enable an assessment as to whether PCDD or PCDF should be regarded as Contaminants of Concern (COC) for the Omex site. A COC is one that is present in sufficiently high concentrations to wanant further investigation with respect to risks to human health and which may require specific management or remediation.

The analytical program was undertaken by an appropriately qualified laboratory (ESR) in accordance with US EPA method 8290.

The Dioxin Investigation Report indicates that the maximum concentration of PCDD and PCDF fall below values that are commonly used as action levels or remediation criteria for residential, land use therefore there-should be no implications in regard to the propOsed remediatioirogram. Irrespective of the concentration of PCDD and PCDF the remediation progr would be expected to utiuise environmental controls to limit the generation--of dust anddiment in run off during remediation works. As PCDD and PCDF are semi volatile organic compounds, they would be associated with particulates rather than -vapours and thus controls on dust and sediments for other non volatile contaminants are also relevant to the control of PCDD and PCDF emissions during site works.

Westralia Square, 141 St Georges Terrace, Perth. Western Australia 6000. Telephone: (08) 9222 7000. Facsimile: (08) 9222 7155. Postal Address: P0 Box K822, Perth, Western Australia 6842.

Based on the outcome of the sampling program undertaken by Egis at the Omex site, the following conclusions can be made:

The sampling program indicates that the concentrations of PCDD and PCDF in soil are likely to be elevated at the Omex relative to background concentrations for the surrounding area. Based on the assumption that the maximum concentration of PCDD and PCDF (49.5 pg/g TEQ) is representative of the higher concentrations present across the Omex site, then PCDD and PCDF would not be present at sufficiently high concentrations to warrant further consideration with respect to risks to human health. This assumption is considered to be reasonable given that the sampling program was biased to locations and depths assessed aa having the greatest potential of being affected by elevated concentrations of PCDD and PCDF.

The EPA is satffied on the advice of the EPA's independent consultant (Woodward-Clyde) and the Health Department of Western Australia who have both reviewed the Dioxin Investigatibn report related to the Omex Site Remediation that the presence of PCDD and. PCDFat the Omex site should have no implications in regard to the proposed remediation program.

Please provide copies of the EPA's advice together with a copy of the Dioxin Investigation Report related to the Omex Site Remediation to all members of the Implementation Consultative Community, Ms J Bremmer and Mr L Bell and notification of its public availability is to be advertised in the EPA's weekly advertisement in Saturday's West Australian.

Kind Regards

Bernard Bowen CHAIRMAN

CC Woodward-Clyde Health Department of Western Australia Appeals Convenor, Cl- Office of the Minister for the Environment

F

I gisconsuImig

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

TABLE OF CONTENTS

EXECUTIVESUMMARY ....... .. ....................... .. ................................... . ...... .. .................................... 1

INTRODUCTION

2

BACKGROUND INFORMATION ................ fl .................................... 3

2.1 CONTAMINATION OVERVIEW...........................................................................................3

2.2 DIOXIN CHEMISTRY AND SOURCES................................................................................4

2.3 EPA INSTRUCTIONS ..........................................................................................................5

INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY.................................... 6 3.1 INVESTIGATION PROGRAMME .........................................................................................6

3.2 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS ....................................................................................................6

3.2.1 Soil Sampling...............................................................................................................7

3.2.2 Field Contamination Ranking ......................................................................................7

3.3 ANALYTICAL VERIFICATION .............................................................................................8

3.3.1 Analytical Programme..................................................................................................8

3.3.2 Quality Control.............................................................................................................9

3.4 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA ................................................................................................... 9

ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT ............. ....... 11

4.1 OBJECTIVE .......................................................................................................................11

4.2 INVESTIGATION RESULTS ..............................................................................................11

4.3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS .............................................................................................. 11

4.4 HUMAN HEALTH IMPLICATIONS 13 W/ENVIRON/JOBS/

VWIIOO\315

RP.00-004-0

5IS coizcuI!J!Jg

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

4.5 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................................13

4.6 AIR MONITORING RESULTS............................................................................................14

5. REFERENCES ........ ............ ............................................... 15

TABLES

TABLE 1 Field Contamination Ranking

TABLE 2 Analytical Results

TABLE 3 Air Monitoring Results

TABLE 4 Dioxin Sampling Locations

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 Omex Site Dioxin Sampling Locations

ATIACHMENTS

ATTACHMENT 1 EPA Instructions

ATTACHMENT 2 Proposed Dioxin Testing Program

ATTACHMENT 3 EPA Endorsement

ATTACHMENT 4 OHS Plan

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Quality Assurance Plan

APPENDIX B Field Logs

APPENDIX C Photographic Record

APPENDIX D Analytical Laboratory Certificates

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

fZA gis arnsuI:z

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Egis Consulting was commissioned by the Waste Management Division of the

Department of Environmental Protection to undertake a dioxin testing programme at the

Omex site located on Clayton Road in Bellevue. The investigation was required to comply

with a condition of approval of the project as required by the Environmental Protection

Authority (EPA). The requirement was to undertake dioxin testing prior to trial excavation

work and the full scale remediation.

From 1955 to 1979, the Omex site was used as an oil re-refinery plant where acidic waste

sludges and oils were disposed into an unlined clay pit. In the past there have been fires

within the pit which may have potentially lead to the formation of dioxins.

Dioxins are chemically classified as halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons. The term dioxin

refers specifically to polychiorinated dibenzodioxin (PCDD) and includes polychlorinated

dibenzofurans (PCDF).

The dioxin sampling programme was undertaken in accordance with EPA instructions

which included the testing of one sludge and one oil sample from the pit, three natural soil

samples external to the pit with elevated levels of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and

two samples of natural soil from outside of the Omex site but within a 1 km radius.

Samples were tested for all relevant congeners of Polychiorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDD)

and Polychiorinated dibenzofurans (PCDF) in accordance with US EPA method 8290.

Results were expressed both individually and as a total 2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-

dioxin (TCDD) toxicity equivalence (TEQ) which is the standard measure for dioxins.

The observed dioxin TEQ levels at the Omex site including the pit contents were all

relatively tow ranging from 0 ppt to 49.5 ppt TEQ. The US Agency for Toxic Substances

and Registry (ATSDR) proposes a residential action level of 1,000 ppt TEQ. Background

levels were at 0 ppt.

Dioxin and dioxin like compounds (TCDDs and TCDFs) have been detected at the Omex

site at levels which are well below health based response levels proposed by ATSDR. As

such, with regard to dioxins, the material sampled should pose no risk to future users of

the site.

The waste sludge and oil from the pit and the surrounding soils sampled in this

investigation will be removed to landfill as part of the site clean-up. The levels of dioxin

found indicate there is no need for additional management controls beyond those already

proposed for the remediation.

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 1

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTINGAT

THE OMEX SITE

1. INTRODUCTION

Egis Consulting was commissioned by the Waste Management Division of the

Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) to undertake a dioxin testing

programme at the Omex site located on Clayton Road in Bellevue.

The purpose of the investigation is to consider an issue raised in the

Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) response to the proponents proposal to

remediate contaminated land: Rehabilitation of the Omex Contaminated Site

Bellevue: Consultative Environmental Review. The EPA have approved the

proposal to remediate the Omex site which is detailed in the Bulletin 951, released

September 1999. The Bulletin includes a condition to undertake dioxin testing

prior to the trial excavation and full scale remediation. To ensure the EPA's

conditions are met, the DEP has undertaken testing of the pit sludge and

surrounding natural soils for dioxin.

From 1955 to 1979, the Omex site was used as an oil re-refinery plant where

acidic waste sludges and oils were disposed into an unlined clay pit. In the past

there have been fires within the pit, which may have potentially lead to the

formation of dioxins.

Combustion of organic material in the presence of a chlorine source has the

potential to produce dioxins. Also some hydraulic oils which may have been

reprocessed could have possibly contained PoIy Chlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) as

an additive. PCBs can contain very low levels of Polychlorinated dibenzofurans

(PCDF) which is a dioxin like compound. Chemical analysis of the waste sludge

and oil did not detect any PCBs. However, as a precautionary measure, the EPA

requested that the presence of dioxin and dioxin like compounds be investigated

prior to remediation.

W:/ENV!RON/JOBS/

VW1 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 2

gis CO/SU/

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

2.1 CONTAMINATION OVERVIEW

The Omex site is contains an abandoned clay pit with dimensions of 40 m by

70 m with an average depth of 7 m. This pit has been filled over time with waste

acidic oil sludges from an oil re-refinery previously located on the site. The pit

contains approximately 15,000 m3 of oily waste with elevated levels of heavy

metals, in particular lead. In addition there are locations with soil contamination

both associated and independent of the waste disposal activities that occurred

within the pit.

FOBs were not found in either the oil or sludge component above the level of

detection which was 0.1 ppm for sludge and 1 ppb for oil (Golder, 1997). FOBs

may however exist within the oil and sludge at levels below the laboratory

detection limit but at such concentrations they do not represent an environmental

or human health issue.

The characteristics of the oil wastes have been thoroughly assessed and are

considered to be hazardous to both human health and the environment primarily

due to their corrosive nature. Proposed site remediation involves pH treatment

and off-site disposal of contaminated material.

Soil has been impacted due to a range of events from waste overflow from the pit

to oil spillage from the redrumming facility. Investigations have identified

approximately 13,000 m3 of contaminated soil (excluding pit contents) over an

area of 4,500 m.

The underlying groundwater in both formations has been impacted by the pit. The

principal contaminants are sulphate, hydrocarbons, and the heavy metals nickel

and zinc. The Guildford Clay due to its impermeable characteristics is relatively

free of contamination. Groundwater in the upper part of the Leederville Formation

contains more extensive contamination which has been detected up to 150 m

downgradient of the pit. However, the more significant contamination from a

human health and environmental perspective is restricted to within 100 m of the pit.

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 3

gis COI7SU

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PRO TECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

2.2 DIOXIN CHEMISTRY AND SOURCES

Dioxins are chemically classified as halogenated aromatic hydrocarbons. The

term dioxin refers specifically to polychlorinated dibenzodioxin (PCDD) and a

large group of chemically similar compounds including polychlorinated

dibenzofurans (PCDF), brominated dioxins and furans (BDD & BDF), and

polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs-coplanar & mono-ortho coplanar).

The PCDDs and PCDFs are considered to be the primary dioxin like compounds

of concern and are therefore routinely tested. BDDs, BDFs and dioxin like PCB's

are not currently subject to the same level of consideration.

Dioxin like compounds arise from the four major sources:

Combustion and incineration;

Chemical manufacturing and processing;

Industrial and municpal processes; and

Redistribution of "accumulated stores".

In Western Australia due to a relatively low level of industrial activity, combustion

and redistribution stores are considered to be the principal sources. The burning

of wastes, coal, wood and petroleum products, smelting operations and furnaces

can all lead to dioxin formation. As dioxins are persistent and hydrophobic, they

can accumulate in the environment in sediments and vegetation. Releases back

into the environment can occur during events such as bushfires which account for

75% of the dioxin input into the environment in Australia (Environment Australia,

1998).

Background levels of dioxin in soil range significantly between urban and rural

environments and between countries as a function of their level of

industrialisation. An international comparison of background dioxin levels in soils

is provided in the New Zealand Ministry for the Environment Reporting on

Persistent Organochlorines in New Zealand, September 1998. In New Zealand,

levels in an urban environment range between 0.5 ppt and 6 ppt, 0.1 ppt to 5 ppt

in Australia, 2.5 ppt to 20 ppt in the USA, and 4 ppt to >60 ppt in the UK. There

are no published background levels for dioxin in Western Australia.

W:/ENVIRON/JOBS/

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 4

gis consuin

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

2.3 EPA INSTRUCTIONS

The EPA instructions outlined a specific methodology and approach to

undertaking the dioxin investigation (refer Attachment 1), the proponent concurred

with the nominated approach which was then submitted to the EPA for

endorsement in August 1999 (refer Attachment 2). The EPA endorsed the

proponent's sampling programme in late August 1999 and included additional

comments relating to the Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) plan (refer

Attachment 3).

The dioxin sampling programme was to include testing samples of the following:

One sludge;

One lighter oil;

Three natural soil samples external to the pit with elevated Polycyclic Aromatic

Hydrocarbon (PAH) levels;

Two natural soil samples outside of the Omex site but within 1 km, to be used

as background reference results.

The pit was to be drilled in a location considered to represent the worst of the

contamination based on the results of previous investigations. Soil external to the

pit was sampled at 10 locations considered to exhibit potential PAH contamination

based on the results of previous investigations. All 10 locations were tested for

PAHs, samples from these locations which contained the three highest levels of

PAHs were selected for dioxin analysis. Figure 1 shows the sampling locations on

the Omex site.

Background samples were recovered at two local parks located in Bellevue;

Goodchild Oval and Elder Park. These locations were considered to have the

lowest potential for dioxin contamination as there are no potential domestic

sources such as barbeques or garden waste/wood burning.

The forms of dioxin to be tested for include all relevant congeners of

Polychiorinated dibenzodioxins (PCDD) and Polychiorinated dibenzofurans

(PCDF) in accordance with US EPA method 8290. Results are to be expressed

both individually and as a total 2,3,7,8 Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TODD)

equivalence.

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VW1 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 5

gis consul

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

3. INVESTIGATION METHODOLOGY

3.1 INVESTIGATION PROGRAMME

Investigations into the presence of dioxins were undertaken in accordance with

the EPA instructions issued to the proponent in July 1999 (refer Attachement 1).

The dioxin investigation was performed concurrently with investigations into the

gases that could potentially be generated from the contents of the waste pit.

Investigations were undertaken concurrently as both programmes involved drilling

into the major pit.

An occupational health and safety plan (OHS) was developed specifcally for the

drilling programme. This plan was submitted to the EPA and was approved prior

to commencement of drilling activities. The OHS plan detailed safety procedures

and necessary protective equipment, handling of the waste and air monitoring

requirements. The OHS plan was reviewed and understood by all those involved

in the drilling programme. A signed copy of the OHS plan is provided as

Attachment 4.

3.2 FIELD INVESTIGATIONS

Field investigations comprised continuous soil sampling with a hollow stem auger

drill rig within the major pit and hand augering outside of the pit in natural soils.

The field investigation phase was undertaken on 14 September 1999. All

sampling was performed in accordance with the Egis Consulting Quality

Assurance Plan, which is attached as Appendix A. Field logs are attached as

Appendix B. A photographic record was maintained which is attached as

Appendix C. All field investigations were performed under the supervision of a

suitably qualified person in the assessment of contaminated sites.

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VW1 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 6

igis consulung

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

3.2.1 Soil Sampling

Samples from the major pit were recovered continuously in 0.75 m cores and

were logged together along with a photographic record. Waste material from two

cores (1.5 m depth interval) were equally divided into two large sample

containers. Subsamples were then recovered from each 1.5 m depth interval and

submitted for dioxin analyses.

Natural soil was recovered with a hand auger with a discrete sample (0.15 m

interval) taken where insitu soil was first observed. This occurred at depths

ranging from 0.3 m to 0.7 m on-site, and at 0.1 m off-site.

The subsurface conditions encountered in each soil sampling location were

logged together with a description of lithology and field ranking of any apparent

contamination. The field ranking system is outlined in Section 3.3.2.

The soil/sludge samples were placed into teflon lided laboratory prepared jars and

stored in a chilled container. Samples were transported to the laboratory with

accompanying chain-of-custody documentation.

3.2.2 Field Contamination Banking

Each sample was assigned a field rank from 0 to 3 in accordance with the criteria

set out in the following table. This is performed to aid in the selection of samples

for laboratory testing.

TABLE 1- FIELD CONTAMINATION RANKING

RANK DESCRIPTION

0 No odour or visual evidence of contamination

1 Slight visual evidence of contamination and/or slight odour

2 Visual evidence of contamination and/or odour

3 Visual evidence of gross contamination and/or strong odour

W:/ENV1RON/JOBS/

VWI 100,3I5

RP-00-004-0

Page 7

[gis CCfJSU/fl

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

3.3 ANALYTICAL VERIFICATION

Laboratory analysis of soil and sludge samples was undertaken on those

considered to represent the highest potential for dioxin impact. EPA instructions

were to analyse those soil samples with the highest PAH levels and to recover

sludge in that part of the pit known to contain the highest concentrations of PAHs.

The rationale for selecting PAHs is not explicit in the EPA instructions but is based

on the fact that PAHs are a byproduct of an incomplete combustion process (ie;

oil fire in the pit). It should also be noted that PAHs are found in waste oils

resulting from the same processes within vehicle engines.

PAH levels in the pit sludge are relatively low ranging between 18 mg/kg and 46

mg/kg compared to the response level of 20 mg/kg (DEP, 1999). PAH levels in

soils are also relatively low and are mostly below the response level (DEP, 1999 &

Egis, 1999).

3.3.1 Analytical Programme

The dioxin testing program included seven samples in total, one each of oil and

sludge and five of soil. The PAH testing programme as a precursor to dioxin

analyses included 11 soil samples of which one was a triplicate for Quality

Assurance/Quality Control purposes.

The primary laboratory in WA was Analytical Reference Laboratory (ARL),

55 Wittenoom Street, East Perth and the secondary laboratory was Australian

Environmental Laboratories (AEL), 52 Murray Road, Welshpool. Both

laboratories are NATA (National Association of Testing Authorities) registered.

Samples were submitted to the Institute of Environmental Services and Research

Limited (ESR) in New Zealand for dioxin analyses. ESR is accredited by The

World Heath Organisation for analyses of dioxins (PCDD's & PCDF's-described in

following subsection) in selected matrices.

ESR use a high resolution gas chromatography high resolution mass

spectrometry using isotopically labelled, surrogate standards based on USEPA

Method 8290. This method provides data on all toxic 2,3,7,8-chlorinated PCDD

and PCDF isomers as well as totals of non 2,3,7,8-chlorinated PCDDs and

PCDFs for each homologue group (tetra to octa). A total of 25 congeners are reported.

W./ENVIRON/JOBS/

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 8

gis ccnsuIt/

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

3.3.2 Quality Control

Quality control provisions included triplicate testing of one soil sample for PAHs.

Both the primary laboratory duplicate and secondary laboratory triplicate reported

the same result being below the detection limit. The primary sample is identified

as D1O.

ESR have an internal QAIQC system which is noted in their Certificate of Analysis.

With respect to the dioxin samples, there was a raising of detection limits for the

sludge sample (5A) due to hydrocarbon interference. The oil sample and soils D2

and D3 displayed surrogate recovery rates below the method acceptance criteria

which may potentially result in minor underestimation of congener results. This is

not considered to be significant.

3.4 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

In terms of assessing the significance of PCDD and PCDF levels, observed

concentrations are converted into a value where toxicity is standardised. Dioxin

like compounds are all compared to 2,3,7,8 TCDD or the reference dioxin which

has a toxicity equivalence factor (TEF) set at 1 (all other congeners TEF

gis consulting

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

The safe level of exposure or minimal risk level (MRL) for dioxins is 1 pg/kg/day

for TODD (ASTDR, 1989). The 1 pg/kg/day exposure limit is approximately two

orders of magnitude below the noncancer and cancer health effect levels. The

50 ppt lEO screening value is at the low end of the range reflecting currently

recognized areas of scientific uncertainty; this range is 50-50,000 ppt, which is

based on the 1,000 fold uncertainity factor used to derive the MRL (ASTDR,

1997).

The acceptance criteria used in this assessment for dioxin compounds at the

Omex site is based on the 1997 ATSDR guidance values which is set at

1,000 ppt TEO as a response level and 50 ppt TEQ as an investigation or

screening level. Section 4 outlines the investigation results.

W:/ENVIRON/JQBS/

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 10

MA gis consul/i

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

4. ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

4.1 OBJECTIVE

The objective of the environmental investigations was to assess the contents of

the pit and surrounding natural soils for dioxin and dioxin-like compounds. The

investigation included air monitoring for sulphur dioxide emissions during the

drilling programme.

4.2 INVESTIGATION RESULTS

Analytical results are shown on Table 2. Analytical test certificates are included as

Appendix D. Soil/sludge sampling locations are shown on Figure 1.

4.3 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS

The observed dioxin TEQ levels were all relatively low ranging from 0 ppt to

49.5 ppt, this compares to the ATSDR residential action level of 1,000 ppt.

Samples Dli and D12 represent the background samples obtained from

Goodchild Oval and Elder Park respectively. Both sites exhibited no detectable

levels of dioxin.

The oil within the pit exhibited a dioxin TEQ concentration of 0.87 ppt,

2,3,7,8 TCDD was not detected which is considered to be the most hazardous

dioxin. The sludge sample from the bottom of the pit was submitted for analyses,

a dioxin TEQ of 0 ppt was reported. However, the limit of detection was higher

compared to uncontaminated soil samples due to interference from high levels of

hydrocarbons in the sludge. Therefore as a conservative interpretive measure, it

was assumed that dioxins are present at half the detection limit and this results in

a calculated TEQ of 124 ppt. This level is only 12% of the ATSDR action level for

residential soils. Applying the full detection limit as real values raises the TEQ to

only 24% of the action level.

W./ENVIRON/JOBS/

VW1 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 11

g15ccnsuIung

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PRO TECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

Dioxin levels detected on-site were elevated compared to local background

values but below the 50ppt lEO investigation screening level. Three insitu soil

samples were taken in areas outside of the pit with a higher potential for dioxin as

indicated by elevated PAH concentrations. The closest sample location (D3) to

the pit exhibited a dioxin TEQ of 49.5ppt, this location is between the major and

minor pit No 1. Sample location D6 exhibited a dioxin TEQ of 13.6 ppt and at

sample location D2, a dioxin TEQ of 0.622 ppt was reported.

TABLE 2 - ANALYTICAL RESULTS.

[iAMPLUOCATIOH Total PoIeeItc Aruiat Hyfirocarlions nJk_o'irnw

Totalftioxrn TEOs jgIg or not

Dl 0.6m

gis

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

4.4 HUMAN HEALTH IMPLICATIONS

The observed dioxin TEQ levels in the soil are below the ATSDR screening level

of 50 ppt. The insitu soil tested in the vicinity of the pit is to be removed as part of

the proposed soil excavation programme (Egis, July 1999). The sludge within the

pit may contain dioxin TEQ levels anywhere between 0 ppt and 244 ppt. At a

worst case theoretical concentration of 244 ppt, the sludge is still well below the

ATSDR action level of 1,000 ppt.

It should be noted that the observed dioxin levels found on-site are well below

internationally recognised response criteria and would be suitable to remain on-

site for residential purposes.

4.5 CONCLUSIONS

Dioxin and dioxin like compounds (TCDDs and TCDFs) have been detected at the

Omex site at levels which are well below health based response levels. As such,

will regard to dioxins, the material sampled should pose no risk to future users of

the site.

The waste sludge and oil from the pit and the surrounding soils sampled in this

investigation will be removed to landfill as part of the site clean-up. The levels of

dioxin found indicate there is no need for additional management controls beyond

those already proposed for the remediation.

/

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWIIOO\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 13

gis consult/n

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

4.6 AIR MONITORING RESULTS

The OHS plan for the dioxin investigation included air monitoring for sulphur

dioxide. The nominated limit was 2 ppm for occupational exposure immediately

downwind of the drill rig within a distance of 10 m. Monitoring was undertaken

with a hand held Drager Tube which draws air into a reactor tube. The reactor

tube has a concentration scale which changes colour in the present of SO2. The

monitoring results indicate that during the drilling exercise, levels of SO2 did not

exceed either the occupational limit of 2 ppm or the detection limit of 0.25 ppm,

results are shown on Table 3.

TABLE 3-AIR MONITORING RESULTS

Time Activity Weather S02 Epiiml 9.45 am Prior to drilling Westerly wind, wet

gis consul in

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

5. REFERENCES

ASTDR (1989). Toxicological profile for 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin. US

Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic Substances and

Disease Registry, 1989.

ASTDR (1997). Dioxin and Dioxin-Like Compounds in Soil, Part 1, Interim Policy

Guidelines. US Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic

Substances and Disease Registry, August 1997.

DEP (1999). Consultative Environmental Review: Rehabilitation of Omex

Contaminated Site, Bellevue. Department of Environmental Protection, January

1999.

Egis (1999). Soil Contamination Status of the Omex Site. Egis Consulting

Australia, Report No VW1 100/002, July 1999.

Environment Australia (1998). Persistent Organic Pollutants - Dioxin Emission

Study, August 1998.

NZME (1998). Reporting on Persistent Organochlorines in New Zealand. NZ

Ministry for Environment, September 1998.

USEPA (1994). Health Assessment Document for 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-

dioxin (TCDD) and Related Compounds. US Environmental Protection Agency,

August 1994.

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Page 15

I consuh'mg

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

FIGURES

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

gis cons,iitin

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

ATTACHMENT 1

W/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100/315

RP-00-004-0

Environmental Protection Authority

Mr Bryan Jenkins Chief Executive Officer Department of Environmental Protection (Waste Management WA)

Dear Bryan

OM1EX REHABILITATION SITE - DIOXIN TESTING

Recently I had discussions with an officer from the Health Department of WA on this matter, and was advised that it seemed likely that dioxin in the area would not be a problem in the context of the clean-up of the OMEX site.

However, it is also recognised that specific details regarding dioxins at the OMEX site are unknown and their implication to management can only be inferred by literature results. Additionally, the issue of dioxins has been raised publicly in this assessment and the EPA would need to address this issue within the EPA report. Therefore, it is considered prudent that the proponent undertake sampling for dioxins in order for the EPA to more accurately assess the site-specific risks which the proposal may present to both human health and the environment.

The following information details the requirements of a preliminary/informative

dioxin study.

Sampling Locations:

To provide an appropriate indication of the risks associated with dioxins at the OMEX site it is reconirnended that the study should include samples obtained

from:

waste pit materials;

surrounding site area (external to the pits); and

similar residential locations away from the OMEX site.

WstraIia Square, 141 St Georges Terrace, Perth, Western Australia 6000. Telephone: (08) 9222 7000. Facsimile: (08) 9222 7155. Postal Address: P0 Box K822, Perth, Western Australia 6842.

Forms of dioxins to be testedfor:

The analysis for dioxins shall be according to US EPA method 8290. This includes all relevant congeners of PCDDs and PCDFs. The results are to be reported as concentrations for the individual congeners and as a total 2,3,7,8 TCDD equivalence. Guidelines and health risks are normally expressed on the basis of 2,3,7,8 TCDD Toxicity Equivalence Factors (TEF).

Sampling Methodology:

The proponent is required to provide an appropriate sampling methodology, which will ensure representative results are obtained. By utilising the results of previous site investigations an effective judgemental sampling strategy can be implemented. For example, locations within the major waste pit and surrounding soils, which have returned elevated Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) concentrations, should be targeted for dioxin analysis during this study.

The proponent should consider the following points when preparing their sampling methodology.

Sampling within the major pit should include the viscous heavy fractions ('tar' like materials) and lighter oily sludges, as identified within the CER (Section 4.2.1). Two samples should be obtained for dioxin analysis.

Soil sampling external to the major pit should be guided by previous laboratory results exhibiting elevated PAR concentrations. It is likely that this will include soil from the areas surrounding the major waste pit which experienced over-flow in 1988/1989. Samples should be screened for PAR with the three highest results being analysed for dioxins.

Sampling for 'background' dioxin concentrations should be undertaken away from the OMEX site within a similar residential environment (within 1-km radius). Two samples should be obtained for dioxin analysis, one from each material type.

Composite sampling is not to be undertaken.

Samples from the major waste pit should be obtained at depth within representative materials. Samples external to the pit should be obtained from greater than 10cm below the surface level.

Quality field sampling procedures (chain of custody recording, de-contamination, storage, etc.) need to be defined by the proponent.

Sampling equipment (jars, bottles etc.) should meet laboratory requirements. Use of laboratory supplied materials is preferred.

Observations made during sampling should be recorded appropriately (field notes, logs, photographs etc.)

Reporting:

The proponent will provide a report to the EPA within two weeks of receiving final laboratory results.

Authority to Proceed with Testing:

Upon review and approval of the proposed sampling approach authority to proceed with dioxin testing will be granted.

Should the sampling program results not be available prior to the EPA completing its report, the EPA is likely to include the sampling program and assessment of analysis results obtained as an environmental condition which will require clearance prior to implementation of the OMEX site clean-up.

Should you wish to further discuss any of the above matters, please contact Mr Ray Claudius on 9222 7188 in the first instance.

Kind regards

Bernard Bowen CHAIRMAN

20 July 1999

CC: Health Department of WA Woodward Clyde

1S consulting

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

ATTACHMENT 2

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100/315

RP-00-004-0

4400'egis consulting

PERTH OFFICE

Australia

17 August 1999

Department of Environmental Protection Waste Management Division 4 Floor, Westralia Square 141 St Georges Terrace PERTH WA 6000

ATTENTION: Ms Catherine Bozanich

SUBJECT: DIOXIN TESTING PROGRAMME

Dear Catherine

In response to the EPA advice on dioxin sampling, letter dated 20/7/99, please find attached the proposed sampling programme which is effectively as what was outlined by the EPA. Attached are also the OH&S and field investigation quality assurance plans which are required prior to drilling.

I will put all drilling work on hold until the EPA and yourselves have endorsed the sampling programme. I trust all is to your satisfaction.

Yours sincerely

DAVID ROSS SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTIST

CA, W:Envimn'J0BSWV1100\VW1100315'gvw4310.doc Page 1 200 AdelaIde Terrace Perth WA 6000 Australia P0 Box 6311 East Perth WA 6892 Tel: Fax: Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited A Groupe Egis Company ACN 000 912 630

DIOXIN SAMPLING PROGRAMME

OMEX SITE, BELLEVUE.

SAMPLING METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this investigation is to determine the existence of dioxin compounds in both the waste material and surrounding soil. Concern has been raised regarding the potential for dioxins to be produced during past fire events within the pit.

Samples to be tested include the waste and insitu soil external to the pit. The waste sludges will be tested in the southern half of the pit, this is where the waste was found to contain more significant contamination and free oil. A drill rig with continuous coring will be used to recover samples over the entire pit profile. Based on field observations, a sample of the worst of the solid "tar—like" sludge and 'free oil" will be taken.

Soil outside of the pit will be tested in two distinct locations where elevated PAH concentrations above environmental guidelines were detected. These locations are in the vicinity of the 1988 spill onto Lots 51 and 52 Henkin Street, and north of the demolished oil re-refinery site immediately east of the major pit.

A total of 10 samples will be taken from both locations and subjected to a PAH analyses, of these, the three highest results will then be tested for dioxin. Soil samples will be collected with a hand auger from a discrete depth of 0.1 m to 0.2 m.

Outside of the Omex site, two samples will be taken from public open space within a residential environment inside a one kilometre radius of the site. Those locations will both be in Bellevue; Goodchild Oval (south of the site) and E!der Park. (east of the site). Samples will be collected by hand auger from a depth of 0.1 m to 0.2 m No PAH analyses is proposed as they, will represent uncontaminated background samples Both locations will be testedfor dioxin

consulting Australia

CR - W\Environ',JOBS'V'W1 100\ VWI 1003 15\ovw43 10 dcc Page 2

FIELD SAMPLING PROCEDURES

Sampling will be undertaken in accordance with quality control provisions and in accordance with the advice provided in the EPA letter of the 20/7/99. An occupational health and safety plan has been prepared for the investigation work which details procedures and protective equipment requirements. Emergency responses are also included.

Quality control with regard to field work inclusive of decontamination and sampling protocols will be to a high standard in accordance with the Egis Consulting Quality Assurance Plan. This plan details the collection and storage of samples.

For QA purposes, a triplicate insitu soil sample will be taken from the Omex site at one location and tested for PAH's. Each soil bore will be logged by a person suitably qualified in the assessment of contaminated sites. A photographic record will be maintained of each sample.

Samples will be delivered to the laboratory on ice and with accompanying chain of custody documentation.

ANALYTICAL TESTING

Samples will be stored in laboratory prepared glass jars and tested for either or both; PAHs and dioxin. PAH testing will be performed in Perth at a NATA registered laboratory. The dioxins will need to be tested at ESR laboratories in New Zealand. There are no laboratories in Perth or Australia capable of performing the tests to the same standard. Dioxin testing will be according to US EPA method 8290 for priority congeners of PCDDs and PCDFs. They will be expressed individually and as a total 23,7,8 TCDD.equivaience. Dioxin will be reported to a detection limit of between 0 1 nd 2 pg/g

REPORTING

The reult of the investigation will be reported in an Environmental Site Assessment fOmiat with tabular presentation of results and discussion on the outcome of the investigation The report will be inclusive of field logs and laboratory test certificates

'1 Any dioxin detected will be assessed against current Health Department and EPA advice regarding toxicity H 41Acc,gis consu/t/iig

Australia CR - W.\EnvironVOBSWWl iOC\VW1 1003 15\cvw43lO.doc Page 3

consulth7g

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEK SITE

ATTACHMENT 3

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWIIOO\315

RP-00-004-0

Environmental Protection Authority

Mr Bryan Jenkins Chief Executive Officer Department of Environmental Protection (Waste Management WA)

Dear Bryan

OMEX REHABILITATION SITE - DIOXJN TESTING

The Environmental Protection Authority has reviewed the proposed Dioxin sampling strategy (including accompanying details regarding health and safety management) and consider these measures to be satisfactory; conditional to the following issues being addressed prior to implementation.

Comments regarding the sampling plan:

1. Soil sampling undertaken on-site surrounding the major waste pit should ensure

that samples are selected from natural ground. (i.e. no sampling within surface

fill or similar materials).

Detailed field records should be maintained for each sampling location as per the initial EPA letter dated July 20 1999 (notes, logs, photographic records, change of

custody of samples etc.).

Comments regarding the Health and Safety Plan (HASP):

On-site personnel involved with activities are required to sign-off on the HASP

prior to works commencing.

Drums of contaminated drill cuttings, personal protective equipment (PPE) etc. should be disposed of at appropriatelY designated facilities.

Exclusion zones for personnel without higher levels of PPE should be established and maintained during intrusive works.

Facsimile: (08) 9222 7155. Westralia Squarc. 141 St Georgcs Tetrace. Perth. Western Australia 6000. Telephone: (OS) 9222 7000.

d" . 1 PCi Rivc K922. Perth. Westc,rfl Australia 6842.

LE86E60 01 NOISIrIU iN3W30UNUW 3ISIP1 L1Od 8:8 EEET-9fl—t

£d - IOI

Samples and associated packaging will require appropriate decontamination prior to final dispatch to the testing laboratory.

All operations should be undertaken in a mariner so as to reduce dust generation.

Kind regards

az~~~ Bernard Bowen CHAIRMAN

26 August 1999

jcccr ni klfliTnTfl I HLiflHJHIJ =1 IHP1 Ufl.l-4 Ft-flfl-T

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

ATTACHMENT 4

W./ENV/RON/JOBS/

VWI 1001315

RP-00-004-0

Australia

DOCUMENT NO:VW1 100/000/31 5/RP-00-001 -0 I

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH & SAFETY PLAN

DIOXIN INVESTIGATION

OMEX PETROLEUM SITE, BELLE VUE

Gint: j , DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION leil / Repor.t!tf (21 VW1100/315/RP-00-001-0

Dated 11 August1999

C opyright Notice: Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited 1999 The copyright in this work is vested in Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited and the document is issued in confidence for the purpose only for which it is supplied. It must not be reproduced in whole or in part except under an agreement with, or with the consent in writing of, Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited and then only on the condition that this notice appears in any such reproduction. No information as to the contents or subject matter of this document or any part thereof may be given orally or in writing or communicated in any manner whatsoever to any third party without prior consent in writing of Egis Consulting Australia Pty Limited

REV DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION BY EGIS CONSULTING

CHECKED EGIS CONSULTING

APPROVED FOR ISSUE

0 17-08-99 Final Report Issued to Client DER PT

I consufring


OMEX SITE SOIL CONTAMINATION

INVESTIGATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

1

SITE DESCRIPTION_ ............

SUPERVISION TEAM & TASKS........... ............3

NOTIFICATION OF SITE ACTIVITIEL.......

HEALTH a SAFETY ISSUES....... .....

5.1 UNDERGROUND SERVICES ..................................... ... ...................................................... 5

5.2 MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL HAZARDS .................................................................... 5

5.3 CHEMICAL HAZARDS......................................................................................................... 5

5.4 HANDLING OF WASTES AND DECONTAMINATION PROCEDURES .............................. 6

5.5 MISCELLANEOUS ............................................................................................................... 6

5. SITE CONTROL__................ ..... ........................ . ......... ...... 1

1. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EOUIPMENT............._

8. EMERGENCY

EN V/JOBSN Wi 100/315

RP-00-001

REV:0

gis wnsufthq



INVESTIGATION

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The project objective is to assess the presence of dioxin in the waste material

within the major pit and in soil contamination that occurs at the Omex site. This

contamination is associated with the past disposal of acidic oily wastes from an oil

re-refining plant into an abandoned clay pit.

This plan addresses the health and safety issues of the proposed drilling program

to collect sludge and oil samples from the pit and contaminated soil samples.

Included is the collection of two soil samples from local government land which

are considered to be clean background samples. A copy of this plan will be

circulated to all site personnel, including the drilling contractors, the Site

Supervisor (Egis Consulting) and any authorised government representatives

before works proceed.

Project tasks include the:

Drilling on the major pit to the base at an approximate depth of 7 m. This will

be done with a hollow stem auger drill rig.

Collection of soil samples at 10 locations on-site and two off-site with a hand

auger.

Cuttings from soil bores will be returned to the hole. Where there is excess

drill cuttings, these will be placed within sealed drums to be disposed of

according to the level of contamination present.

Site activities will be carried out by personnel from:

Egis Consulting

Drilling Contractor

Any changes in the scope of works must be amended in writing by the Health &

Safety Representative (see Section 3).

ENV/JOBSNWI 100/315

RP-00-001

REV:0 Page 1

gis cojisuit

OCCUPATIONAL HEALTh & SAFETY PLAN


INVESTIGATION

2. SITE DESCRIPTION

The study area lies within the Omex site bounded by Henkin Street, Clayton

Street and Purton Place, and to the east by the bowling club and service station.

The site is shown as Figure 1.

The extent of soil contamination has been the subject of a number of

investigations and is shown superficially or at the surface on Figure 2.

The substances of concern from a human health perspective are:

Acidity in the waste;

Sulphur Dioxide air emissions from exposed waste;

Low volatility petroleum hydrocarbons in the waste and soil;

Heavy metals - particularly lead in the waste and soil; and

. Phenols in the waste and soil.

ENVIJOBSNWII00/315

RP-OO-OO1

REV:O Page 2

Mljeeg. aJ/lsuIm7g



INVESTIGATION

3. SUPERVISION TEAM & TASKS

The investigation team will comprise Egis staff, the drilling contractor and field

hand. Egis staff will manage the investigation and undertake all sampling and

monitoring.

During the drilling in the pit, there will be two Egis personnel, one attending to

sample collection and logging, with the other providing support and performing air

monitoring. A third point of contact will reside in the office during the drilling

programme and will be available in the event of any emergency.

The drilling contractor will drill through the pit and collect the samples in the form

of a core. Due to the hazardous nature of the pit waste, there will be two persons

at all times involved in operating the drill rig.

Supervision Team Job Function

Field Supervisor Supervision of drilling, sampling and site health

and safety issues. Qualified OH&S officer

having completed a recognised course.

Field Scientist Provide support to the Field Supervisor and

perform all hand augering sampling outside of

the pit.

Project Manager Senior supervision of the investigation program

and point of contact for any queries relating to

site works.

ENV/JOBSNW1IOO/315

RP-OO-OO1

REV:O

gicosui



INVESTIGATION

4. NOTIFICATION OF SITE ACTIVITIES

The site activities will be undertaken wholly within property owned by the State

and Local Government and Omex, all of whom are aware of the drilling

programme.

The OH&S plan will be issued prior to any site activities occurring and a summary

review of the main safety considerations will be given to site personnel before any

ground disturbing activity takes place.

EN VIJOBSN WI 100/315

RP-00-00I

REV:0 Page 4

dreg.f.5 ccnsulth7g



INVESTIGATION

5. HEALTH a SAFETY ISSUES

I

Details on potential hazards and the associated protective measures to ensure

occupational health and safety issues are, managed are outlined below.

5.1 UNDERGROUND SERVICES

Drilling is mostly confined to the Omex site and adjoining properties on Clayton

Street with the exception of the two background samples. Underground services

to the properties have been disconnected due to the recent demolition activities.

There are no services within the Omex site. Underground services off-site will be

located prior to hand augering.

5.2 MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL HAZARDS

Drilling will be undertaken by a licensed drilling operator in close consultation with

the Site Supervisor. As such, it is the responsibility of the contractor to ensure

that the machinery to be used is in good working order thus minimising the risk of

electrical fire or mechanical failure causing bodily harm. Power for the rig will be

sourced from a generator supplied by the drilling contractors.

Overhead hazards may occur where drilling equipment is located in close

proximity to power lines. Drill locations have been chosen to minimise potential

interference with any overhead lines. It will be the responsibility of all persons on-

site to ensure that these hazards are avoided whenever equipment is to be set up

or moved

5.3 CHEMICAL HAZARDS

The following substances may be present in the waste and/or soils encountered

during the drilling operation:

Acidity in the waste;

Sulphur dioxide air emissions from exposed waste;

Low volatility petroleum hydrocarbons in the waste and soil;

ENV/JOBSIVWII00/315 • Heavy metals - particcilarly lead in the waste and soil; and

RP.00-OO1

REV:O Page 5

tegis ccnsultiiig



INVESTIGATION

, Phenols in the waste and soil.

Any contaminationis likely to be visible.

Exposure is possible by inhalation and dermal contact with contaminated cuttings

and soil cores. Suitable protective clothing will be used at all times, the level of

which is dependent upon the risk (see Section 7). The possibility of inhalation of

dust and airborne particles is considered minor based on previous similar drilling

investigations on the Omex site itself.

During drilling within the pit, there exists the potential for exposure to gaseous

sulphur dioxide emissions. This is expected to be very low given the small cutting

into the waste (

igis ccnsuu!/7g OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH &

SAFEP( PLAN OMEX SITE

SOIL CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

6. SITE CONTROL

All drilling (distinct from hand augering) will be confined to the Omex site.

Buildings on the site are either currently being demolished or are vacant. The

Omex site has secure perimeter fencing which will be kept closed during the

drilling programme.

A warning sign informing that activity is in progress will be shown at the front

entrance. Access to the Omex site will be limited to authorised site personnel as

dictated by the Project Manager.

ENV/JOBS/VW11001315

RP-OO-OO1

REV:O Page 7

8JS coiisuitfrig

OCCUPATIONAL I-IEALTR & SAFETY PLAN


INVESTIGATION

1. PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT

Wearing of personnel protective equipment (PPE) is designed to prevent skin

contact and inhalation with the chemicals of concern in the soil and waste. The

level of protection required is a function of the hazard posed by the contaminants.

As a minimum in soils (as distinct from the pit waste), the following PPE is

required where hand augering is used to recover soil samples:

safety glasses;

. latex gloves;

. steel cap boots; and

. standard Tyvek overalls.

The PPE required for the drilling exercise is of a higher standard due to the

hazardous nature of the waste. All personnel working with and in close vicinity to

the drill rig will be required to wear the following PPE:

safety goggles;

twin respirator for organ ics and fine dust;

impermeable Tyvek suit;

. nitrile rubber gloves (two pair-inside and outside of suit);

. nitrile rubber steel cap boots;

ear plugs; and

. hard hat.

The above mentioned PPE will be required to be worn during the initial cleaning of

drilling equipment.

At the completion of all drilling work, the PPE will be removed in the work area

and either cleaned, or disposed of (ie Tyvek overalls and gloves) into waste

drums.

ENV/JOBSJVWII00/315

Rp-oo-oo1

REV:O Page 8

consle'/tIng



INVESTIGATION

8. EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

The following pages are to be posted in a prominent location in close proximity to

the work area.

SITE EMERGENCY INSTRUCTIONS

Site Evacuation Point:

Front entrance, Clayton Street, Bellevue

Monitored Substances of Concern:

Sulphur dioxide 2 ppm occupational limit over 8 hours

Chemical Compounds Present in Waste:

Acidity

Metals - Lead, Zinc

Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons

Aliphatic heavy fraction hydrocarbons

Egis Consulting Office Telephone

Project Manager David Ross 9220 9401

On-site Occupational Health & Safety

Representative: Peter Thorpe (0419 953 024)

ENV/JOBSNWI 100/3 15

RP-00-001

REV:0 Page 9

i g1Sccnsu/tirn OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH &

SAFETY PLAN OMEX SITE

SOIL CONTAMINATION INVESTIGATION

SITE EMERGENCY FORM

IN THE EVENT OF ANY EMERGENCY, CONTACT PROJECT MANAGER,

OR HEALTH AND SAFETY REPRESENTATIVE

RD(kIt'V 0Ut'%K1= MI IIIJD

Ambulance 000

Fire 000

Police 000

Project Manager David Ross 9220 9401

Health and Safety Reps Peter Thorpe 0419 953 024

Poison Control 131 126 (PMH)

State Agency Health Department of WA

Hospital Name Swan District Hospital

Eveline Road

Middle Swan

Hospital Phone: 9347 5244

I FIRST AID FOR SUBSTANCES OF CONCERN

Ingestion: DO NOT INDUCE VOMITING. Call Poison Control; follow instructions. Administer CPR, if necessary. Seek medical attention.

Inhalation: Remove person from contaminated environment. DO NOT ENTER A

CONFINED SPACE TO RESCUE SOMEONE WHO HAS BEEN

OVERCOME UNLESS PROPERLY EQUIPPED AND A STANDBY

PERSON IS PRESENT. Administer CPR if necessary. Seek medical

attention.

Skin Contact: Brush off dry material, remove wet or contaminated clothing. Flush skin

thoroughly with soap and water. Seek medical attention if irritation persists.

Eye Contact: Flush eyes with water for 15 minutes. Remove contact lenses if present.

Seek medical attention.

Contingency Plan: Report incident to Project Manager and Health and Safety Representative after emergency procedures have been implemented.

ENV/JOBS/VWII00/315

RP-OO-OO1

REV:O Pane 10

5IS consuig

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

APPENDIX A OUJALITY ASSURANCE PLAN

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VVVI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

19is consulting

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

APPENDIX A

OMEX SITE INVESTIGATION QUALITY ASSURANCE PLAN -1999

1. INTRODUCTION

This Quality Assurance Plan documents procedures to be followed by employees

of Egis Consulting Australia Environmental, their subconsultants/subcontractOrS

when involved in field investigations designed to assess the nature and extent of

ground contamination. This Quality Assurance Plan also applies when providing

advice to assist in the remediation of contaminated sites.

The extent of field investigations will be as defined in the relevant proposal/cost

estimate for ground contamination assessments. The programme of works

associated with site remediation will be developed on a site specific basis,

dependent on remediation technique.

All the work performed during this study will be performed under the direction of

an experienced field engineer.

All personnel involved in the field investigations will conform with the requirements

of a site-specific health and safety plan. Access to the investigation areas will be

restricted to personnel directly involved in the investigation.

Underground site services will be located from the available plans, wherever

possible, prior to commencement of the field work and relevant data will be

assembled on a single plan for use by the field engineer.

W:/ENVIRON/JOBS/

VV'/1100\315

RP-00-004-0

5/S consuftlg

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

SAMPLING LOCATIONS AND IDENTIFICATION

All soil gas sample points, hand auger holes and bores will be located by

reference to existing ground features, e.g. fences, buildings, etc. with distances

being measured by graduated tapes, or pacing.

All soil gas sample points, auger holes and boreholes will be numbered

consecutively, and the following prefixes will be assigned:

SGS: Soil-gas probe sampling point

SB: Auger holes

MB: Boreholes (groundwater monitoring)

All depth measured in bores and hand auger holes will be referenced to the

ground surface (0 m).

AUGER HOLES

An area will be established onsite where all equipment may be cleaned without

risk of contaminating areas to be sampled. On arrival onsite, the sampling

equipment will be decontaminated in accordance with the procedures outlined in

Section 7.

Samples will be recovered from the drill/hand auger, taking care to avoid cross

contamination, especially between samples recovered from the same hole but at

different depths. All sampling equipment is to be thoroughly cleaned between

sampling events, in accordance with the procedures outlined in Section 7.

A log of soil conditions and other observations including evidence of

contamination, will be prepared on standard field log sheets.

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

is conii,g

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

4. BOREHOLES

The drilling rig to be used will be in sound working order and free of oil leaks.

A cleaning pad will be established on the site where the drilling rig and other

large equipment can be cleaned without risk of contamination to sampling

locations. Power and water will need to be located nearby to enable use of a

steam-clean unit. A suitable generator will be required where a power supply

is not available.

On arrival at the site the drilling rig will be cleaned including all drilling

equipment which will go into or be used near the borehole. The drilling rig and

all drilling equipment will also be cleaned between boreholes.

Hollow auger equipment will be used to drill each borehole. No petroleum

based lubricants are to be used on the drill string or any sampling equipment.

Samples will be recovered at approximately 1 m intervals to the specified

depth of sampling, or at other locations considered appropriate by the field

engineer.

Logs of the soil encountered will be prepared on standard borehole log sheets.

The soil will be logged using the Unified Method of Soil Classification and

Notes and Abbreviations.

On completion of drilling the borehole is to be backfilled with clean cuttings. If

appropriate, the top of the borehole will be grouted with concrete.

5. PID HEADSPACE MEASUREMENTS

PID headspace readings shall be taken by placing soil cuttings, recovered from

the sampling location, in an appropriate glass vial and covered with an aluminium

foil seal. The jar shall be filled to approximately 50% of its capacity and stored

away from direct sunlight for between 5 and 10 minutes. A headspace reading

shall be obtained by piercing the foil seal and inserting the probe of the PID into

the vial headspace, with care being taken not to tear the seal such that ambient air

may enter. The PID reading shall be observed and the maximum level recorded.

Note, the calibration of the PID shall be checked on a regular basis.

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

gis consg

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

6. MONITORING SORE INSTALLATION

Monitoring bores will be installed in accordance with Water & Rivers Commission

requirements.

1. SAMPLING AND CLEANING

All sampling equipment will be thoroughly cleaned before use and between

samples. This includes the spatulas, trowels, scoops etc. any other equipment

that is used. All cleaning will be performed on a clean surface, such as a plastic

sheet. The cleaning procedure for all sampling equipment will involve:

wash in tap water removing gross contamination

wash in DECON 90 solution (or similar phosphate-free laboratory detergent)

rinse copiously with tap water

rinse with de-ionised water

Field blanks will be prepared by running distilled water over the cleaned sampling

tools and collecting the water in a clean jar, filling the jar to capacity.

The field engineer is to wear clean vinyl/rubber gloves when handling soil

samples and cleaned equipment.

Each soil sample other than BTEX is to be placed in a pre-washed or new glass

jar with a tight fitting screw top lid. The pre-washing will be performed in the

laboratory using the procedure outlined above. Clean aluminium foil may be used

to ensure an air tight seal. BTEX soil samples will be placed into an appropriate

vial and crimp sealed.

Each sample jar is to be labelled with the following information:

Sample identity

Date of sampling

Depth of sample

W:/ENVIRON/JOBS/

VWI 100\315

RP-00.004-0

de_gis coIg

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

Chain-of-custody documentation is to be completed onsite. This will include the

information listed above and if appropriate, the chemical analyses required for

each sample. The field engineer is to sign the appropriate section of the chain-of-

custody form before handing over the samples to the laboratory.

All samples are to be stored at approximately 4°C, or below, prior to analysis.

This includes transportation and onsite storage.

Where samples are to be analysed for monocyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, the

sample will be placed in a sealed headspace vial, taking care to minimise the loss

of volatiles.

Groundwater samples will be recovered using a suitable bailer, cleaned in

accordance with the above procedures. Prior to sampling the monitoring bore will

be purged by bailing or otherwise pumping 3 bore volumes or until field

parameters have stabilised. Groundwater samples will be transferred from the

bailer to the clean sample containers using a bottom-emptying device to minimise

the loss of volatile species. Depth to groundwater will be determined after bore

development but prior to purging and sampling, after allowing sufficient time for

the groundwater levels to re-establish. The depth to groundwater will be

measured using a clean water level indicator.

All samples are to be transported to the chemical laboratories by the field

engineer, or a designated courier who must be documented in the chain-of-

custody documentation (see attached chain-of-custody documentation).

W:/ENVIRON/JOSS/

/W1 100\315

RP-00-004-0

gjs consiii'g

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

APPENDIX B W:/ENV!R ON/JOBS!

FIELD LOGS VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

Omex Environmental Site assessment Soil Bores Dioxin Testing Log Sheet

18 September 1999

Soil Bore

Number

Depth Interval

Lithology Field Rank

Dl 0.0- 0.3m Gravelly SAND; light brown, fine to coarse grained quartz, fill material 0 Photo 1 03 - 0.7m Sandy CLAY; dark grey black, fine to medium grained quartz, low plasticity 3

D2 0.0 - 0.3m Gravelly SAND; light brown, fine to coarse grained quartz, fill material 0 Photo 2 0.3 - 0.5m Gravelly CLAY; dark grey, fine to medium grained, low plasticity 2

D3 0.0 - 0.2th Gravelly SAND; light brown, fine to coarse grained quartz, fill material 0 0.2- 0.4m Sandy CLAY; dark brown, fine to coarse grained quartz, low plasticity 1

Photo 3 0.4- 0.6m Silty CLAY; black, fine grained silts, some quartz, low plasticity 2/3

D4 0.0- 0.3m Gravelly SAND; light brown, fine to coarse grained quartz, fill material 0 Photo 4 03 - 0.6m Sandy CLAY; dark brown, fine to medium grained quartz, low to medium plasticity 1

D5 0.0 - 0.5m Silty GRAVEL; light brown, fine to coarse grained, limestone and gravel fill 0 Photo 5 0.5- 0.7m Sandy CLAY; light grey grey, fine to medium grained quartz, low plasticity 0

D6 0.0- 0.2m Silty SAND; dark grey, fine to medium grained quartz, predominantly fine, low plasticity

0

Photo 6 0.2- 0.3m Sandy CLAY; orange brown, fine grained, low to medium plasticity, (Fe staining) 0

D7 0.0- 0.2m Silty SAND; dark grey, fine to medium grained quartz, predominantly fine grained 0 Photo 7 0.2 - 0.5m Sandy CLAY; orange brown, fine grained, low to medium plasticity, ( Fe staining) 0

D8 0.0-0.2m Silty SAND; dark grey, fine to medium grained quartz, predominantly fine grained 0 Photo 8 0.2- 0.5m Sandy CLAY; orange brown, fine grained, low to medium plasticity, ( Fe staining) 0

D9 0.0- 0.2m Silty SAND; dark grey, fine to medium grained quartz, predominantly fine grained 0 Photo 9 0.2- 0.7m Sandy CLAY; orange brown, fine grained, low to medium plasticity, ( Fe staining) 0

D10 0.0- 03m Silty SAND; dark grey, fine to medium grained quartz, predominantly fine grained 0 Photo 10 0.3 - 0.6m Sandy CLAY; light brown, fine grained, low to medium plasticity, laterite gravels 0

Dli 0.0 - 0.lm Silty SAND; grey dark grey, fine to medium grained quartz 0 Photo 11 0.1 - 0.7m Silty SAND; light grey, fine to medium grained quartz 0

D12 0.0- 0.1m Silty Clayey SAND; brown, fine to medium grained quartz, low plasticity 0 Photo 12

Samples taken from specific locations around the perimeter of the Omex Waste Pit. Refer to photographic logs one to twelve in reference to soil types recorded above.

Client DEP Logged By: P Thorpe Drill Rig: OZ Drill Bore Ret: CMC

Project: Omex P M Date: 14/9/99

Job No: \W1100 Estimated Ground Level: 18.6 mAHD

CMPS&F Pty Limited Environmental Engineers & Scientists

ACN 000 912 630

200 Adelaide Terrace, Perth WA 6000

Tel: (08) 9220 9300 Fax: (08) 9325 9897

Depth Sample Monitor SWL PlO Uthology Field Samples

BGL Taken Well (rn) pmv) flank

Log

poorly

FILL: Yellow, medIum-coarse grained,

sorted quartz sand beneath HOPE cover.

Dry no oil.

CONTAMINATED FILL:

Grey claye sand. Oil-stained in part.

Concrete rubb e at 1.95 m

Sample 1(1.2

2.0

3.0

Gre

4.0

CONTAMINATED FILL: Sample 2 (2.5

sandy clay & minor laterite gravel. Oil-eta ned.

Sofl. Glass bottle ha iments

Sample

5.0

Dark

CONTAMINATED FILL:

grey clayey sand. Bands of black oil staining.

6.0

__

CONTAMINATED FILL: Sample 4 (5.5

C to black hard clayey sand wit

crystalline material

sulphate crystals) and E:Ery oil sludge wastes. High astringent odour level. 7.0

CONTAMINATED FILL:

Black hard silty clay with strong sulphur odour.

Oil coating grains.

I SAND: Black oil stained sand from 7.75 m. Sample 5 (7.0

Probably natural ground Initltrated by oil waste liquor.

8.0

SANDY CLAY__________________

clay and clayey sand at 8.5 m.

at 8.5 m. Minorlaterite gravel.

visible oil staining.

Sample 6 (8.5.

9.0 Yellow/brown ssndy

Base of pit II II

No

10.0

Note EON 9.25 m BGL

Casing: None

Drillhole: Backfihled with cuttings Wastes: (drill cuttings & PPE) placed in 2 steel 200L drums

labelled CMC 1 of 2 and CMC 2012.

2.5m)

.40m)

5.5m)

7.Om)

.85m)

.925m)

fiegis consulting

Department of Environmental Protection

Omex - Dioxin Testing

T'

- soRe.

Mull

wr - - - --------- -

- - -

t-

Photo 1 - Soil Bore: Dl

Depth Drilled: 0.7m

:

I'. *

-

4 -'-,-

.- - -,

Photo 2 - Soil Bore: D2 Depth Drilled: 05m

rZ egIs consulting



=

c3oRE D.a 0 ,

- .•

I t 0

19

no

.5..). .

-

S —'.es.t: • .1 _,.5 9$::4•.

2 4

-

Photo 3 - Soil Bore: D3 Depth Drilled: 0.6m

I --- -. 5 WS •

--9

.: .

S.;

• .•. . ••. :. . • •.... .

. i• :.

r - -'5- .

• -. S F. C

- -

Photo 4 - Soil Bore: 04 Depth Drilled: 0.6m

t5egis consulting Atntfj1,O




I - — -0., ? - '

- coRE


egis consult/u5


Omex Dox n Testirg

- - - 7- '

v'- PC j

! ' I ; d I, I

"--


ILI,.-)

—*

:f soRE v::it9

- -

5


egis ccItmg


0mx - Doxr Testhig


Photo 10 - Soil Bore: 010 Depth Drilled: 0.6m

I egis c/tmg


Omex - Diox1r Tostirg

-,

yl 0• i'

Photo 11 - Soil Bore: Dli

Depth Drilled: O.lm

Photo 12 - Soil Bore: D12 Depth Drilled: O.lm

I C IS consu/ting


Ornex -- Dox:n Tes:ing

Photo 15 - Bore Hole: 0MG Depth: 1.95 - 2.5m

Photo 16 - Bore Hole: CMC Depth: 2.5— 3.25m

egis consulting


Omex - Doxn Testing

Photo 17 - Bore Hole: CMC Depth: 3.25 - 4.Om

Photo 18 - Bore Hole: CMC Depth: 4.0 - 4.75m

- •- -r ;r

!

42, egis A'rio


On,x - Doxin Tesuc

Photo 21 - Bore Hole: 0MG Depth: 6.25 - 7.Om

Photo 22 - Bore Hole: CMC Depth: 7.0 - 7.75m

V •,

.• ~4 .

Eli- . '* r ,' -'*-- - , - cji1- •;

*

W- .'---

5J5 consult/fig

DEPARTMENT OF

ENVIRONMENTAL

PROTECTION

DIOXIN TESTING AT

THE OMEX SITE

APPENDIX D ANALYTICAL LABORATORY CERTIFICATES

W:/EN V/RON/JOBS!

VWI 100\315

RP-00-004-0

23 November 1999

Certificate of Analysis

Client: EGIS consultingAustralia Pty Ltd PU Box 6311 East Perth 6892 WA AUSTRALIA

Attention: David Ross

Date Received: 27 October 1999

ESR Laboratory Reference: 991888

Sample Type: Solid

Analysis: Polychlorinated dibenzo-p -dioxins (PCDDs) Polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs)

Method: Isotope Dilution

The samples were spiked with isotopically labelled surrogate standards and extracted with organic solvent. The extracts were purified by chemical treatment and solid phase chromatographic techniques. Measurement was performed using high resolution gas chromatography with high resolution electron

impact mass spectrometry. Full details are available on request.

Results are reported in picograms per gram (p gIg), equivalent to ppt, on a dry weight hasi to two

significant figures. The sum of PCDDs and PCDFs is calculated and reported excluding limit of

detection (LOD) values to three significant figures.

The total toxic equivalents (I-TEQ) was calculated for each sample using international toxic equivalen;y

factors (i-TEFs). The total I-TEQ level is reported excluding LOD values values to three significant

figures.

IANZ endorsement applies only to the application of an approved analytical method for the determination of PCDDs and PCDFs in these samples. I

(laboratoryy

All tests reported herein have been performed In accordance with the laboratory's scope of accreditation

Organic Chemistry Laboratory ESR Analytical

3 L Aliwood Organic Chemistry Laboratory ESR Analytical

SLipplementary Report THIS REPORT MUST ONLY BE REPRODUCED IN ITS ENTIRETY

CLAUI8\991888dx Page 1 of 8

Jnstitte of Environmental Science & Research Limited Wellington Science Centre Gracefield Road, P0 Box 30-547, Lower Hull, New Zealand A CROWN RESEARCH

Telephone: (04) 570-1555, Facsimile: (04) 569-4500 INSTITUTE

23 November 1999

Sample Details:

Sample Identification ESR Laboratory

Reference

Sample Type Date Received

0.5m 99 1888/1 Solid 27 October 1999

0.6m 991888/2 Solid 27 October 1999

D6, 0.3m 991888/3 Solid 27 October 1999

Dli, 0.1m 991888/4 Solid 27 October l999

D12, 0.1m 991888/5 Solid 27 October 1999

5A, Ornex 991888/6 Solid 27 October 1999

Abbreviations:

CDD = chlorodibenzo-p -dioxin 1-TEF = International toxic equivalency factor

CDF = chlorodibenzofuran I-TEQ = International toxic equivalent

T = tetra '3C12 RE = recovery of 13C12 surrogate standard

Pe = penta pglg = picograms per gram (equivalent to ppt)

Hx = hexa ppt = parts per trillion

Hp = hepta < = less than limit of detection (LOD)

0 =octa

l 4 upplementary Report THIS REPORT MUST ONLY BE REPRODUCED IN ITS ENTIRETY

CLAUI8\99l888 dx Page 2of8

23 November 1999

Results

ESR Laboratory Reference: 99 1888/1

Sample Identification: D2, 0.5m

PCDD/PCDF Level t 1-TEF 1-TEQ '3c1 2 RE Congener pg/g pg/g %

2378 TCDF < 10 0.1 0.5 17 PC Non 2378 TCDF < 10 0 0

2378TCDD

23 November 1999

Results



PCDDIPCDF Levelt 1-TEF I-TEQ 13C12 RE

Congener pglg pglg %

2378 TCDF 15 0.1 1.5 9

Non 2378 TCDF 1100 0 0

2378 TCDD < 10 1 5 18 Eb

Non 2378 TCDD < 10 0 0

12378 PeCDF 21 0.05 1.05 24 Fb

23478 PeCDF 37 0.5 18.5 12 P

Non 2378 PeCDF 1200 0 0

12378 PeCDD

23 November 1999

Results



PCDD/PCDF Levelt 1-TEF I-TEQ RE

Congenei pg/g pg/g %

2378 TCDF 1.6 0.1 0.16 83

Non 2378 TCDF 62 0 0

2378 TCDD 7.2 1 7.2 92

Non 2378 TCDD 300 0 0

12378 PeCDF

23 November 1999

Results

ESR Laboratory Reference: 991888/4

Sample Identification: Dli, 0.1 m

PCDD/PCDF Levelt 1-TEF I-TEQ 13C12 RE

Congener pg/g pg/g %

2378 TCDF

23 November 1999

Results


Sample Identification: D [2, 0. im

PCDD/PCDF Levelt T-TEF I-TEQ 13C1 1 RE

Congener pg/g p.z/ %

2378TCDF

23 November 1999

Results


Sample Identification: 5A, Omex

PCDD/PCDF Levelt 1-TEF I-TEQ '3C12 RE

Congenei pglg pglg %

2378 TCDF

24 November 1999

Certificate of Analysis

Client: EGIS ConsultingAustralia Pty Ltd P0 Box 6311 East Perth 6892 WA AUSTRALIA

Attention:

Date Received:

ESR Laboratory Reference:

Sample Type:

Analysis:

Method:

David Ross

27 October 1999

991888

Oil

Polychiorinated dibenzo-p -dioxins (PCDDs) Polychiorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs)

Isotope Dilution

The samples were spiked with isotopically labelled surrogate standards and extracted with organic solvent. The extracts were purified by chemical treatment and solid phase chromatographic techniques. Measurement was performed using high resolution gas chromatography with high resolution electron

impact mass spectrometry. Full details are available on request.

Results are reported in nanograms per gram (ng/g), equivalent to ppb, on an as received basis to two significant figures. The sum of PCDDs and PCDFs is calcu!ated and reported excluding limit of

detection (LOD) values to three significant figures.

The total toxic equivalents (I-TEQ) was calculated for each sample using international toxic equivalency factors (I-TEFs). The total I-TEQ level is reported excluding LOD values values to three significant

figures.

IANZ endorsement applies only to the application of an approved analytical method for the determination of PCDDs and PCDFs in these samples.

All tests reported

OA herein have been performed in accordance with the laboratory's

laboratory scope of accreditation

S V Leathem Organic Chemistry Laboratory ESR Analytical

3 L Aliwood Organic Chemistry Laboratory ESR Analytical

Supplementary Report THIS REPORT MUST ONLY BE REPRODUCED IN ITS ENTIRETY

CLAU18\99 888 dx oil Page 1 of 3

Institute of Environmental Science & Research Limited Wellington Science Centre Gracefield Road, PU Box 30-547, Lower Hutt. New Zealand

A CROWN RESEARCH

Telephone: (04) 570-1555, Facsimile: (04) 569-4500 INSTITUTE

24 November 1999

Sample Details:

Sample Identification ESR Laboratory Sample Type Date Received

Reference

Bore 99 1888/7 Oil 27 October 1999

Abbreviations:

CDD = chlorodibenzo-p -dioxin 1-TEF = International toxi

ccnsu/tthg - epa.wa.gov.au · Omex site located on Clayton Road in Bellevue. The investigation was...

Documents

Transcript of ccnsu/tthg - epa.wa.gov.au · Omex site located on Clayton Road in Bellevue. The investigation was...